/create_plan
You are tasked with creating detailed implementation plans through an interactive, iterative process. You should be skeptical, thorough, and work collaboratively with the user to produce high-quality technical specifications.
$ npx -y skills add dcouple/Pane --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this command gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfClaude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/create_plan
Context preview
What this command does when you run it.
You are tasked with creating detailed implementation plans through an interactive, iterative process. You should be skeptical, thorough, and work collaboratively with the user to produce high-quality technical specifications.
Command definition
create_plan.mdImplementation Plan
You are tasked with creating detailed implementation plans through an interactive, iterative process. You should be skeptical, thorough, and work collaboratively with the user to produce high-quality technical specifications.
Initial Response
When this command is invoked:
1. **Check if parameters were provided**:
- If a file path or ticket reference was provided as a parameter, skip the default message
- Immediately read any provided files FULLY
- Begin the research process
2. **If no parameters provided**, respond with:
I'll help you create a detailed implementation plan. Let me start by understanding what we're building.
Please provide:
1. The task/ticket description (or reference to a ticket file)
2. Any relevant context, constraints, or specific requirements
3. Links to related research or previous implementations
I'll analyze this information and work with you to create a comprehensive plan.
Tip: You can also invoke this command with a ticket file directly: `/create_plan thoughts/shared/tickets/eng_1234.md`
For deeper analysis, try: `/create_plan think deeply about thoughts/shared/tickets/eng_1234.md`
Then wait for the user's input.
Process Steps
Step 1: Context Gathering & Initial Analysis
1. **Read all mentioned files immediately and FULLY**:
- Ticket files (e.g., `thoughts/shared/tickets/eng_1234.md`)
- Research documents
- Related implementation plans
- Any JSON/data files mentioned
- **IMPORTANT**: Use the Read tool WITHOUT limit/offset parameters to read entire files
- **CRITICAL**: DO NOT spawn sub-tasks before reading these files yourself in the main context
- **NEVER** read files partially - if a file is mentioned, read it completely
2. **Spawn initial research tasks to gather context**: Before asking the user any questions, use specialized agents to research in parallel:
- Use the **codebase-locator** agent to find all files related to the ticket/task
- Use the **codebase-analyzer** agent to understand how the current implementation works
- If a Linear ticket is mentioned, use the **linear-ticket-reader** agent to get full details
These agents will:
- Find relevant source files, configs, and tests
- Identify the specific directories to focus on (e.g., if WUI is mentioned, they'll focus on humanlayer-wui/)
- Trace data flow and key functions
- Return detailed explanations with file:line references
3. **Read all files identified by research tasks**:
- After research tasks complete, read ALL files they identified as relevant
- Read them FULLY into the main context
- This ensures you have complete understanding before proceeding
4. **Analyze and verify understanding**:
- Cross-reference the ticket requirements with actual code
- Identify any discrepancies or misunderstandings
- Note assumptions that need verification
- Determine true scope based on codebase reality
5. **Present informed understanding and focused questions**:
Based on the ticket and my research of the codebase, I understand we need to [accurate summary].
I've found that:
- [Current implementation detail with file:line reference]
- [Relevant pattern or constraint discovered]
- [Potential complexity or edge case identified]
Questions that my research couldn't answer:
- [Specific technical question that requires human judgment]
- [Business logic clarification]
- [Design preference that affects implementation]
Only ask questions that you genuinely cannot answer through code investigation.
Step 2: Research & Discovery
After getting initial clarifications:
1. **If the user corrects any misunderstanding**:
- DO NOT just accept the correction
- Spawn new research tasks to verify the correct information
- Read the specific files/directories they mention
- Only proceed once you've verified the facts yourself
2. **Create a research todo list** using TodoWrite to track exploration tasks
3. **Spawn parallel sub-tasks for comprehensive research**:
- Create multiple Task agents to research different aspects concurrently
- Use the right agent for each type of research:
**For deeper investigation:**
- **codebase-locator** - To find more specific files (e.g., "find all files that handle [specific component]")
- **codebase-analyzer** - To understand implementation details (e.g., "analyze how [system] works")
- **codebase-pattern-finder** - To find similar features we can model after
**For related tickets:**
- **linear-searcher** - To find similar issues or past implementations
Each agent knows how to:
- Find the right files and code patterns
- Identify conventions and patterns to follow
- Look for integration points and dependencies
- Return specific file:line references
- Find tests and examples
3. **Wait for ALL sub-tasks to complete** before proceeding
4. **Present findings and design options**:
Based on my research, here's what I found:
**Current State:**
- [Key discovery about existing code]
- [Pattern or convention to follow]
**Design Options:**
1. [Option A] - [pros/cons]
2. [Option B] - [pros/cons]
**Open Questions:**
- [Technical uncertainty]
- [Design decision needed]
Which approach aligns best with your vision?
Step 3: Plan Structure Development
Once aligned on approach:
1. **Create initial plan outline**:
Here's my proposed plan structure:
## Overview
[1-2 sentence summary]
## Implementation Phases:
1. [Phase name] - [what it accomplishes]
2. [Phase name] - [what it accomplishes]
3. [Phase name] - [what it accomplishes]
Does this phasing make sense? Should I adjust the order or granularity?
2. **Get feedback on structure** before writing details
Step 4: Detailed Plan Writing
After structure approval:
1. **Write the plan** to `thoughts/shared/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-ENG-XXXX
Read more
Implementation Plan
You are tasked with creating detailed implementation plans through an interactive, iterative process. You should be skeptical, thorough, and work collaboratively with the user to produce high-quality technical specifications.
Initial Response
When this command is invoked:
1. **Check if parameters were provided**:
- If a file path or ticket reference was provided as a parameter, skip the default message
- Immediately read any provided files FULLY
- Begin the research process
2. **If no parameters provided**, respond with:
I'll help you create a detailed implementation plan. Let me start by understanding what we're building. Please provide: 1. The task/ticket description (or reference to a ticket file) 2. Any relevant context, constraints, or specific requirements 3. Links to related research or previous implementations I'll analyze this information and work with you to create a comprehensive plan. Tip: You can also invoke this command with a ticket file directly: `/create_plan thoughts/shared/tickets/eng_1234.md` For deeper analysis, try: `/create_plan think deeply about thoughts/shared/tickets/eng_1234.md`
Then wait for the user's input.
Process Steps
Step 1: Context Gathering & Initial Analysis
1. **Read all mentioned files immediately and FULLY**:
- Ticket files (e.g., `thoughts/shared/tickets/eng_1234.md`)
- Research documents
- Related implementation plans
- Any JSON/data files mentioned
- **IMPORTANT**: Use the Read tool WITHOUT limit/offset parameters to read entire files
- **CRITICAL**: DO NOT spawn sub-tasks before reading these files yourself in the main context
- **NEVER** read files partially - if a file is mentioned, read it completely
2. **Spawn initial research tasks to gather context**: Before asking the user any questions, use specialized agents to research in parallel:
- Use the **codebase-locator** agent to find all files related to the ticket/task
- Use the **codebase-analyzer** agent to understand how the current implementation works
- If a Linear ticket is mentioned, use the **linear-ticket-reader** agent to get full details
These agents will:
- Find relevant source files, configs, and tests
- Identify the specific directories to focus on (e.g., if WUI is mentioned, they'll focus on humanlayer-wui/)
- Trace data flow and key functions
- Return detailed explanations with file:line references
3. **Read all files identified by research tasks**:
- After research tasks complete, read ALL files they identified as relevant
- Read them FULLY into the main context
- This ensures you have complete understanding before proceeding
4. **Analyze and verify understanding**:
- Cross-reference the ticket requirements with actual code
- Identify any discrepancies or misunderstandings
- Note assumptions that need verification
- Determine true scope based on codebase reality
5. **Present informed understanding and focused questions**:
Based on the ticket and my research of the codebase, I understand we need to [accurate summary]. I've found that: - [Current implementation detail with file:line reference] - [Relevant pattern or constraint discovered] - [Potential complexity or edge case identified] Questions that my research couldn't answer: - [Specific technical question that requires human judgment] - [Business logic clarification] - [Design preference that affects implementation]
Only ask questions that you genuinely cannot answer through code investigation.
Step 2: Research & Discovery
After getting initial clarifications:
1. **If the user corrects any misunderstanding**:
- DO NOT just accept the correction
- Spawn new research tasks to verify the correct information
- Read the specific files/directories they mention
- Only proceed once you've verified the facts yourself
2. **Create a research todo list** using TodoWrite to track exploration tasks
3. **Spawn parallel sub-tasks for comprehensive research**:
- Create multiple Task agents to research different aspects concurrently
- Use the right agent for each type of research:
**For deeper investigation:**
- **codebase-locator** - To find more specific files (e.g., "find all files that handle [specific component]")
- **codebase-analyzer** - To understand implementation details (e.g., "analyze how [system] works")
- **codebase-pattern-finder** - To find similar features we can model after
**For related tickets:**
- **linear-searcher** - To find similar issues or past implementations
Each agent knows how to:
- Find the right files and code patterns
- Identify conventions and patterns to follow
- Look for integration points and dependencies
- Return specific file:line references
- Find tests and examples
3. **Wait for ALL sub-tasks to complete** before proceeding
4. **Present findings and design options**:
Based on my research, here's what I found: **Current State:** - [Key discovery about existing code] - [Pattern or convention to follow] **Design Options:** 1. [Option A] - [pros/cons] 2. [Option B] - [pros/cons] **Open Questions:** - [Technical uncertainty] - [Design decision needed] Which approach aligns best with your vision?
Step 3: Plan Structure Development
Once aligned on approach:
1. **Create initial plan outline**:
Here's my proposed plan structure: ## Overview [1-2 sentence summary] ## Implementation Phases: 1. [Phase name] - [what it accomplishes] 2. [Phase name] - [what it accomplishes] 3. [Phase name] - [what it accomplishes] Does this phasing make sense? Should I adjust the order or granularity?
2. **Get feedback on structure** before writing details
Step 4: Detailed Plan Writing
After structure approval:
1. **Write the plan** to `thoughts/shared/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-ENG-XXXX
Repo: dcouple/Pane
Other commands on pane.
- /commit
Create git commits with user approval and no Claude attribution
Open command - /describe_pr
Generate comprehensive PR descriptions following repository templates
Open command - /implement_plan
You are tasked with implementing an approved technical plan from `thoughts/shared/plans/`. These plans contain phases with specific changes and success criteria.
Open command - /iterate_plan
Iterate on existing implementation plans with thorough research and updates
Open command - /research_codebase
You are tasked with conducting comprehensive research across the codebase to answer user questions. You will spawn one or more parallel sub-agents to perform your reserach.
Open command - /research_web
Conduct extensive web research on technical topics with validated references
Open command

